MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984228767 · doi:10.30492/ijcce.2019.35854

Separation and Preconcentration of Cobalt(II) from Water Samples with Amberlite CG-120 Resin

2020· article· en· W2984228767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Burcu Kabak, Diğdem Trak, Erdal Kendüzler, Fatma Tomul, Yasin Arslan

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmberliteCertified reference materialsDetection limitChemistryElutionAdsorptionSolid phase extractionChromatographyColumn chromatographyExtraction (chemistry)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Trace AmountsCobaltInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A selective solid-phase extraction method has been developed for the preconcentration and separation of trace amounts of Co(II). The method was based on the adsorption of Co(II) ions on the Amberlite CG-120 resin. The adsorbed Co(II) ions on the resin were eluted by 4 mol/L HCI and then they were determined by Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (FAAS). Various experimental conditions, such as pH, type and concentration of eluent, the flow rate of sample and eluent solution, amount of resin, and sample volume were investigated to obtain better sensitivity and effective separation of trace levels of the Co(II) ions. Moreover, the interference effects of some ions on the recovery of Co(II) were also investigated. The developed method was applied for the determination of Co(II) ions in drinking and wastewater samples. The enhancement factor (EF) and limit of detection (LOD) values were found to be 25-fold and 9.32 µg/L, respectively. The accuracy of the method was tested by the certified reference material of TMDA-70.2 Lake Ontario Water and there was a good agreement between found and certified values at a 95% confidence level.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.264
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207